Advice for Fall 2014 Student

[CrazyCatLady80]

I am currently finishing up my second year in my MA program. I am taking a bit longer, because I had to work full time my first year. After three long years of thinking it through, I decided to go for a PhD and quit working full time to focus on my studies. I am dirt poor, but enjoying every single second of it. Next year, I will be enrolling in PhD programs. I plan on specializing in 20th century urban political history, in particular various ethnic groups and women. I just recently started doing some research on potential grad schools. As of right now, my first choices are University of Michigan or UPenn. Both have professors that I would, hopefully, enjoy working with during my grad school career. The schools I am considering include: Stanford, Berkeley, Chicago, UCLA, UNC, Rutgers, OSU, Univ. of Washington, University of MD, Georgetown, UCSB, Boston, Univ. of CT, Case Western, and Albany. No....I will not be applying to all of them. Does anyone have any useful information regarding these schools or the application process, in general?

As far as my stats go, I will have anywhere between a 3.8 to a 3.9 GPA when I apply. My GPA for my undergrad is 3.0. I did attend a program during my undergrad years that did not have grades for GE courses, but I can get "as if" grades from my professors. So far it has worked for my other two grad school degrees, but I am worried about PhD programs. After I earned my B.A., I completed my MLS with additional certification in archives and records management. My GPA for my MLS was 3.7. For around five years, I worked as an archivist at some pretty major research institutions in NYC and Los Angeles. As for the GRE, I am NOT a good test taker. I am sure I will do well on the verbal, but the math score will be horrible. I am guessing my GRE scores will be the weakest part of my application. I have earned several awards in my MA program and have made several presentations at conferences. I would like to have a paper published or at least under serious consideration in time for next year. I am starting my thesis this semester and it is a pretty interesting topic (of course, I am biased:)). I am sure my LOR, SOP, and writing sample will all be very strong.

[New England Nat]

If you are talking about SUNY Albany... don't bother. I'm sure there are lovely people teaching there, but one of my professors used to teach there and talked about how guilty he felt about their PhD students. That they were smart people they were taking advantage of because none of them had ever gotten a job teaching at the university level. Add to that recent systemwide cuts that have manifested at Albany in drastic cuts and attempted elimination of all languages other than Spanish...

In a PhD application there is no such thing as a safety school, but the buttom of the list shouldn't be impossible.

On another level, i'm mildly curious as to why Princeton didn't make the list given Isenberg and Kruse.

[thedig13]

I am currently finishing up my second year in my MA program. I am taking a bit longer, because I had to work full time my first year. After three long years of thinking it through, I decided to go for a PhD and quit working full time to focus on my studies. I am dirt poor, but enjoying every single second of it. Next year, I will be enrolling in PhD programs. I plan on specializing in 20th century urban political history, in particular various ethnic groups and women. I just recently started doing some research on potential grad schools. As of right now, my first choices are University of Michigan or UPenn. Both have professors that I would, hopefully, enjoy working with during my grad school career. The schools I am considering include: Stanford, Berkeley, Chicago, UCLA, UNC, Rutgers, OSU, Univ. of Washington, University of MD, Georgetown, UCSB, Boston, Univ. of CT, Case Western, and Albany. No....I will not be applying to all of them. Does anyone have any useful information regarding these schools or the application process, in general?

As far as my stats go, I will have anywhere between a 3.8 to a 3.9 GPA when I apply. My GPA for my undergrad is 3.0. I did attend a program during my undergrad years that did not have grades for GE courses, but I can get "as if" grades from my professors. So far it has worked for my other two grad school degrees, but I am worried about PhD programs. After I earned my B.A., I completed my MLS with additional certification in archives and records management. My GPA for my MLS was 3.7. For around five years, I worked as an archivist at some pretty major research institutions in NYC and Los Angeles. As for the GRE, I am NOT a good test taker. I am sure I will do well on the verbal, but the math score will be horrible. I am guessing my GRE scores will be the weakest part of my application. I have earned several awards in my MA program and have made several presentations at conferences. I would like to have a paper published or at least under serious consideration in time for next year. I am starting my thesis this semester and it is a pretty interesting topic (of course, I am biased:)). I am sure my LOR, SOP, and writing sample will all be very strong.

It seems as though your application is mostly-strong, but I have to ask where you stand in terms of foreign language training.

What, specifically, is your geographic region (if any), and which "various ethnic groups" are you focusing on? If any of these groups use a language other than English, what kind of experience do you have with these languages?

[Riotbeard]

Your language won't matter that much for 20th century U.S. urban... Have you thought about Penn? I don't know about their history program, but Adolph Reed (in the poli. sci dept.) has written some really good 20th century urban history stuff. Check out his Stirrings in the Jug. I am sure you could get him on your committee even if you were in the history department. Also, you should look into working with Lizbeth Cohen (Making a New Deal). I think she is at Harvard. Have you looked at Lisa McGirr's stuff?

[CrazyCatLady80]

Thank you everyone for your suggestions.

@New England Nat - I am looking at Princeton. My main concern with some of the Ivies is would I truly be happy there. As an archivist, I worked at Columbia and I often felt I was on another planet. When I visited Princeton, I felt even more that way. However, I know those are the good schools and they have good job placement records so I may just have to get over it.

@thedig13 - By various ethnic groups, I am mostly referring to African Americans, but also some Latinos. I know only a little bit of high school French. I am thinking of taking some Spanish courses at my local community college to show that I am in the process of learning. Do you think that would be a good idea? Like Riotbeard said, language isn't as important with U.S. urban.

@Riotbeard - Penn is on my list (I know I just contradicted my statement above about the Ivies by saying this). They have a really strong urban history program. I would love to work with Thomas Sugrue. His book The Origins of the Urban Crisis is amazing and probably one of the most important urban history books in the past twenty years. I am also looking at Harvard (once again, contradicting myself...lol). I have read Lisa McGirr's work. I actually talked to via email to Lizabeth Cohen back in my archivist days. She was looking for some oral histories and I knew where they were located. Doubt she remembers me. Seemed super sweet. The more I think about it, my work as an archivist is a nice feather in my cap.

One of my main concerns at the moment is that my M.A. program hasn't placed a lot of people in top graduate programs or at least to my knowledge. The only top ten they seem to have gotten anyone into has been UCLA and that seems to be no more, because of inter-department politics. The only other schools I know about are Texas A&M, University of New Mexico, UCSD, UC Riverside, UCSB, University of Texas at Austin, and Brandeis. None of these program are strong in urban political history.

[rising_star]

Not a historian but, just a couple of thoughts.

- Some language training probably wouldn't hurt and could come in handy depending on where exactly in the 20th century your focus is and if oral history may play a role in what you do

- Work on the math for the GRE so that your school isn't terrible! It won't take loads of time and is something concrete you can do to improve your applications.

- I would seriously look at the placement history of the schools before applying to them. But only after taking some time to think about what it is you want to do in your career.

Best of luck!

[Riotbeard]

Sugrue is great. One of my best friends does sunbelt stuff, so I am inundated to a lot of twentieth cent. urban history in spite of the fact that I mostly due 19th century medicine. Good luck. Also Philly is awesome and UPenn is in a really nice spot. I do a lot of research there, and want to move there at some point...

[New England Nat]

Riotbeard I know what you feel like. I don't do medicine except in a very tangental way and get inundated with it for reasons totally not obvious on my cv.

[CrazyCatLady80]

Medicine is fun. I love diseases and subjects that are gross. This is what you get when you are born on Halloween.

[New England Nat]

Medicine is fun. I love diseases and subjects that are gross. This is what you get when you are born on Halloween.

Well, there are any number of lovely books using the history of disease in the Charles Rosenberg school. He just retired but had about a billion students that are all busy writing books. Ever read Wailoo's Dying in the City of the Blues? It's where medicine meets the subjects you are interested in.

[TMP]

I'm guessing you're interested in Kevin Boyle at OSU and Matt Lassiter at Michigan?

[lafayette]

You should definitely check out Robert Self at Brown and Matthew Lassiter at University of Michigan, both of whom are in the Sugrue 'new urban history' school. Michigan is a department that also has some great faculty working in women's history, too ...

If you intend to look into Latino communities as a big part of your research in the future, you'll probably need Spanish. You should definitely get started in one of those beginning classes you were looking into. At the least, it will show you're serious about learning. And even as an Americanist, it never hurts to know a language!

Edited September 4, 2012 by lafayette

[New England Nat]

The discussions of Thomas Sugrue and Lizabeth Cohen have left me trying to decide all day how to write this post. The Making of the New Deal came out in 1990, and while there was second edition it's still a generation old at this point. The Origins of the Urban Crisis came out in 1996. I know this because I pulled them off my bookshelf to look. They are amazing, great books, and just about every Americanist graduate student reads them. I don't know either well enough to know what they are currently doing, I've read Cohen's second book, but before you write an application around wanting to work with these people because of these books make sure they are still interested in these books or these topics.

Rather famously every cycle Yale gets some applicant who wants to work with Daniel Kevles on the history of physics. They always end up cut in the first round because Kevles has been working on the history of genetics for the last 25 years. Make sure you are current on your PoI's scholarship. There are many professors who once they have written on a topic move away from it.

[TMP]

The discussions of Thomas Sugrue and Lizabeth Cohen have left me trying to decide all day how to write this post. The Making of the New Deal came out in 1990, and while there was second edition it's still a generation old at this point. There are many professors who once they have written on a topic move away from it.

Exactly. Case in point: I fell in love with my MA adviser's books, published in early 1990s and mid-2000s. When I arrived, she was working on a topic entirely different from those two books that shaped my research (especially the early 1990s one).

And it's precisely one of the top reasons why I chose not to apply to work with her for my PhD. I don't give a care about her current book project (though it's a nice topic). You want to work with someone whose current project really excites you because you're likely to do some research for him/her as part of the program.

Funny enough, it's exactly what she told me while I was deciding, "Go with X, you're obviously excited about her current book project. The two of you are asking the SAME research questions! The other guy? You'd do well but he's NOT working on a topic that you're interested in for your dissertation." Basically, you'll go further with someone who is currently engaged with the same research questions than someone who's already done it and is now asking different questions.

[Riotbeard]

TMP and Nat: there is definitely some truth to that but you can't know for sure until you apply or e-mail them. Just because someone is not writing a book on the era/topic of their first book does not mean that they are not still interested. In some case, they aren't but plenty of people do work pretty different from their advisors. My work is fairly different from my advisors, although roughly in the same era.

Nat: My second reader was a Rosenberg student back when Care of Strangers came out. While I don't really work on disease per se, his stuff is amazing. His monographs plus Michael Sappol made me glad to embrace the history of medicine moniker, which I was honestly afraid of when you look at the history of science and medicine stuff that is more technical (for lack of a better word).

[New England Nat]

Riotbeard,

I'm history of sciency but not precisely my field. But I know a fair bit about Rosenberg's work and his students for reasons I'm not about to post in public because I might as well be signing my name, but he does very interesting work. Certainly I think the social history that is embraced by his "academic family tree" really did a lot for moving the history of medicine more towards general history and away from the STS and phil. of science inclinations of larger history of science.

And you are right, the PoI doens't have to be right in line, but that's why we contact them before the application. I just want to make sure people think about the fact that if the person's famous book is more than two decades old they might not be that keen on discussing it or it's topics anymore.

I know of another very famous book in the history of technology and women's studies that the author barely wanted to read the 25th anniversary praise of because she hadn't thought about those questions in two decades.

Edited September 4, 2012 by New England Nat

[CrazyCatLady80]

@TMP - How did you know?!?! I don't know about Kevin Boyle, but Matt Lassiter is my dream advisor. It really is an ideal fit. In fact, one of his recent student's thesis really inspired my recent research interest in suburban liberalism. I don't know if that is a good or bad this as far as admissions go. If I got either him or Thomas Sugrue, I would be extremely happy.

[CageFree]

@thedig13 - By various ethnic groups, I am mostly referring to African Americans, but also some Latinos. I know only a little bit of high school French. I am thinking of taking some Spanish courses at my local community college to show that I am in the process of learning. Do you think that would be a good idea? Like Riotbeard said, language isn't as important with U.S. urban.

Just a thought: becoming very strong in Spanish would be very helpful if you were looking at Latinos because it would help understand Latino culture much better. Keep in mind that in Latino neighborhoods, most people Spanish with just enough English to get by. It would also give you access to sources written in Spanish by Latino authors.

[CrazyCatLady80]

So what is the best way to "pick up" a language? I know I only need reading knowledge, but do most people take a basic class? I believe UCLA has an immersion class in the summer through extended ed, but I doubt I will have the time to take it.

[thedig13]

@thedig13 - By various ethnic groups, I am mostly referring to African Americans, but also some Latinos. I know only a little bit of high school French. I am thinking of taking some Spanish courses at my local community college to show that I am in the process of learning. Do you think that would be a good idea? Like Riotbeard said, language isn't as important with U.S. urban.

I didn't know you were U.S. History -- your post didn't specify region. However, now that I've been enlightened, I would urge you to pick up Spanish. While it is true that U.S. historians aren't expected to have transcendant language proficiency, I'm going to parrot what CageFree said: Keep in mind that, within Hispanic-American communities, English isn't always the primary language, and Spanish is an integral part of daily life. Additionally, having a number of languages might give you a critical edge in the applications process.

I'd advise you to take your coursework at the college level; if not, I've been told that Rosetta Stone is the way to go. If you can, find an excuse to spend a month or two overseas, do it. Immersion does wonders for your language proficiency.

Edited September 6, 2012 by thedig13

[virmundi]

The discussions of Thomas Sugrue and Lizabeth Cohen have left me trying to decide all day how to write this post. The Making of the New Deal came out in 1990, and while there was second edition it's still a generation old at this point. The Origins of the Urban Crisis came out in 1996. I know this because I pulled them off my bookshelf to look. They are amazing, great books, and just about every Americanist graduate student reads them. I don't know either well enough to know what they are currently doing, I've read Cohen's second book, but before you write an application around wanting to work with these people because of these books make sure they are still interested in these books or these topics.

Rather famously every cycle Yale gets some applicant who wants to work with Daniel Kevles on the history of physics. They always end up cut in the first round because Kevles has been working on the history of genetics for the last 25 years. Make sure you are current on your PoI's scholarship. There are many professors who once they have written on a topic move away from it.

This is true, but I wouldn't necessarily read too much into their current project. I'm where I am now because my PoI at another school asked me why I wasn't applying to come here. When I explained that I didn't think that my current advisor would be interested in my work, the PoI at the other school scoffed and said: "Apply anyways! [Current advisor] knows those sources very well." Long story short, I applied, was accepted, and am happy to be working with my advisor, who is deeply learned. Most of my advisor's recent students work on closely related areas, but not exclusively.

I would agree that with TMP that there are advantages to working on topics that are closely related to your advisor's current interests, but I wouldn't let that deter you too much. There are also disadvantages to having your advisor's work be too close to your own! In my case, I'll make up for the distance between my advisor's current interests and my own by bringing in an outside reader or two for my dissertation... in the mean time, I'm getting exposed to so many different topics and from so many different angles, which has deeply enriched my experience here!

In other words -- while I would be guided by NEN and TMP's sage advice, I wouldn't let it deter you from applying to good schools where the fit is not ideal. It can be quite hard to predict why you'll be accepted to one program and not another and the logic of acceptances can change within a program from year to year. If you don't necessarily get into your ideal programs, by pitching yourself a bit more broadly, you might still end up in a great program with a good advisor! You might even discover that your interests aren't as set as you thought (although my time thus far is on the whole reinforcing my fascination with my current interests)!

[virmundi]

So what is the best way to "pick up" a language? I know I only need reading knowledge, but do most people take a basic class? I believe UCLA has an immersion class in the summer through extended ed, but I doubt I will have the time to take it.

If you just want to be able to read it -- and quickly -- try "Spanish for Reading." It follows a programmed approach and is supposed to be quite good (I've done its sister book, "French for Reading," so I can speak for the pedagogical approach).